Norwin School Board hears 2025–26 revenue update, approves routine agenda; one personnel item fails

NORWIN, Pa. — The Norwin School District Board of Education on March 17 received a revenue update for the 2025–26 budget and approved a slate of routine agenda, policy, finance, facilities and athletics items while one personnel item failed on a voice vote.

District staff presenter Mr. Kirsch told the board the district’s preliminary revenue picture includes “approximately 2.9 million dollar increase in assessed value,” producing roughly $273,000 in additional local tax revenue tied to that growth. He said the district’s current total millage is 91.63 mills and that a board resolution adopted in January limits any tax increase next year to the Pennsylvania Act 1 index. Kirsch said the adjusted Act 1 index for Norwin is 5.1 percent, which he said would equate to a maximum millage increase of about 4.6 mills (a top rate of 96.3 mills) and would generate approximately $2 million in additional revenue if the board chose that maximum.

The presentation summarized proposed state education funding included in the governor’s budget proposal, with Kirsch describing a large, formula-driven adequacy investment and listing proposed increases the governor had included for basic education, special education and targeted grants. Kirsch also noted that cyber charter reimbursement is not included in the governor’s proposal and that some federal ESSER funds that supported the district in 2024–25 are no longer available.

Why it matters: the revenue numbers and the board’s January resolution shape the district’s options for next year’s budget and any potential change in the millage rate. Kirsch said the district projects roughly $4.6 million in additional revenue next year under the governor’s proposal and current local assumptions, without a tax increase, and that a proposed final budget is expected for board consideration next month.

Board action and routine business

Board members approved minutes from the Feb. 17 meeting and approved grouped agenda items across education, policy, finance, facilities and athletics. Personnel items were acted on as a group with one exception: item No. 6 failed on a voice vote and was not approved. The board later approved the remaining personnel items (items 1–5 and 7–8).

Public comment

Two members of the public addressed the board. Kieran Morrison, listed as a resident, urged the board to make the mock-trial coach a paid position, describing the coach’s out-of-contract work and advocacy for students. Mary Hofford, also listed as a resident, urged caution about proposed capital spending on the stadium and auditorium and described community economic uncertainty; in remarks she referenced figures for stadium and auditorium costs as stated in her comments. Both speakers’ remarks were part of the public-comment record.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes (Feb. 17): motion moved by Ray Kosak; second not specified; outcome: approved (voice vote). - Education agenda items 1–6: motion moved by Koch; second Preverso; outcome: approved (voice vote). - Policy items 1–8 (second reading and approval): motion moved by Shrum; second Elogin; outcome: approved (voice vote). - Finance items 2–4: motion moved by Koch; second Schrum; outcome: approved (voice vote). - Personnel items: initial motion to approve 1–8 failed for item 6 on a voice vote (item 6 did not pass). Subsequent motion to approve personnel items 1–5 and 7–8: mover not specified; second Preverso; outcome: approved (voice vote). Item 6 outcome: not approved (failed; voice vote). - Facilities and support services items 1–5: motion moved by Thomas; second Loggen; outcome: approved (voice vote). - Athletics and activities item 1: motion moved by Perverso; second Shrum; outcome: approved (voice vote).

All voice votes were recorded in the meeting transcript as "aye" or "motion passes"; no roll-call tallies were recorded in the public legislative session for these items.

Looking ahead

Kirsch told the board staff is continuing work on the proposed budget and expects to bring a proposed final budget to the board next month. The board did not set a millage change at the March 17 meeting; the January resolution limiting increases to the Act 1 index remains in place per Kirsch’s summary.